Trump Con­ti­nues His Cam­paign Against Mi­grants And Re­fu­gees

La Jornada (Canada) - - INMIGRACION -

By Ed­ward C. Co­rri­gan

U.S. Pre­si­dent Do­nald Trump’s Ja­nuary 27, 2017 Exe­cu­ti­ve Or­der “Pro­tec­ting the Na­tion From Fo­reign Te­rro­rist Entry In­to the Uni­ted Sta­tes” ban­ned entry in­to the Uni­ted Sta­tes to an­yo­ne who had ci­ti­zens­hip in one of 7 Mus­lim ma­jo­rity coun­tries: Iran, Iraq, Lib­ya, So­ma­lia, Su­dan, Sy­ria, and Ye­men.

The at­tacks on Sep­tem­ber 11, 2001 we­re ci­ted as the jus­ti­fi­ca­tion and the Or­der sta­ted that “nu­me­rous fo­reign-born in­di­vi­duals ha­ve been con­vic­ted or im­pli­ca­ted in te­rro­rism re­la­ted cri­mes” and as­ser­ted that “the Uni­ted Sta­tes must en­su­re that tho­se ad­mit­ted to this country do not bear hos­ti­le at­ti­tu­des to­ward it and its foun­ding prin­ci­ples.”

Trump who loudly and fre­quently pro­clai­med that he would “ban Mus­lims” from en­te­ri­ng the Uni­ted Sta­tes th­roug­hout his Pre­si­den­tial cam­paign wrap­ped his Exe­cu­ti­ve or­der in the Ame­ri­can flag and in­vo­ked the me­mory of the 9/11 at­tacks to jus­tify his ac­tion. This pro­mi­se to “ban Mus­lims” re­so­na­ted with the Con­ser­va­ti­ve Ame­ri­can Heartland se­cu­ring Trump a ma­jo­rity in the Ame­ri­can Elec­to­ral Co­lla­ge. The De­mo­cra­tic Party can­di­da­te, Hi­llary Clin­ton, won the popular vo­te by a lar­ge mar­gin but lost the all im­por­tant Elec­to­ral Co­lle­ge to Trump.

As one US Fe­de­ral Court Jud­ge poin­ted out in over­tur­ning the Or­der that the­re was not a sin­gle act of te­rro­rism com­mit­ted in the Uni­ted Sta­tes sin­ce 9/11 by any in­di­vi­dual from the 7 ban­ned coun­tries. Ac­cor­ding to the FBI the hi­jac­kers in the Sep­tem­ber 11 at­tacks we­re 19 men af­fi­lia­ted with al-Qae­da. Fif­teen of the 19 we­re ci­ti­zens of Sau­di Ara­bia, and the ot­hers we­re from the Uni­ted Arab Emi­ra­tes (2), Egypt, and Le­ba­non.(1) It has been sug­ges­ted that the­se Mus­lim coun­tries we­re not on the list be­cau­se of Trump’s bu­si­ness ties to tho­se coun­tries.

The Uni­ted Sta­tes Court of Ap­peals for the Ninth Cir­cuit up­held the de­ci­sion of the Was­hing­ton Sta­te Fe­de­ral Court Jud­ge who ru­led the Exe­cu­ti­ve Or­der on the 7 coun­tries un­cons­ti­tu­tio­nal and im­po­sed a prohi­bi­tion on the en­for­ce­ment of the Or­der in the en­ti­re Uni­ted Sta­tes. (No. 17-35105 D.C. no. 2:17-cv-00141) The At­tor­ney Ge­ne­rals of the Sta­tes of Was­hing­ton and Min­ne­so­ta led the cha­llen­ge against Trump’s Exe­cu­ti­ve Or­der.

The­re was mi­xed en­for­ce­ment of the Fe­de­ral Court’s initial Or­der and so­me Ho­me­land Se­cu­rity Of­fi­cials con­ti­nue to de­tain le­gally aut­ho­ri­zed in­di­vi­duals from the 7 coun­tries and ot­her in­di­vi­duals who ma­de re­fu­gee claims. Ho­we­ver, af­ter the US Fe­de­ral Court of Ap­peal up­held the de­ci­sion to over­turn the Or­der the Ru­le of Law was ge­ne­rally en­for­ced.

It was the una­ni­mous view of the Jud­ges that the Exe­cu­ti­ve Or­der was dis­cri­mi­na­tory and overly broad and lac­ked the ne­ces­sary fac­tual ba­sis to sup­port such a wi­de spread at­tack on re­fu­gees and in­di­vi­duals who ha­ve been is­sued va­lid vi­sas to en­ter the Uni­ted Sta­tes. Even in­di­vi­duals who had “Green Cards” and we­re le­gal Per­ma­nent Re­si­dents in the Uni­ted Sta­tes but we­re ci­ti­zens of the 7 pros­cri­bed coun­tries we­re arres­ted and de­tai­ned at air­ports and de­nied entry. The­re was chaos at the air­ports and peo­ple we­re te­rri­fied that they we­re being ar­bi­tra­rily se­pa­ra­ted from their lo­ve ones. The­re we­re wi­des­pread de­mons­tra­tions against Trump’s Exe­cu­ti­ve Or­der.

Pic­tu­res of a 5 year-old child who was a ci­ti­zen of one of the pros­cri­bed coun­tries being pla­ced in hand cuffs did not pre­sent Pre­si­dent Trump in a fa­vou­ra­ble light. Stu­dent and Pro­fes­sors who we­re re­tu­ning to the Uni­ted Sta­tes af­ter a vi­sit ho­me we­re being ba­rred from entry and stop­ped from pur­suing their stu­dies or tea­ching as­sign­ments. The­re we­re se­cu­rity clea­red and vet­ted Ira­qi re­fu­gees who had wor­ked as trans­la­tors for the U.S. Mi­li­tary we­re being de­nied entry and th­rea­te­ned with being re­tur­ned to Iraq whe­re their work for the US mi­li­tary put their li­ves at risk.

The­re we­re many ot­her ab­sur­di­ties li­ke ba­rring Is­rae­li Ci­ti­zens who al­so we­re ci­ti­zens one of the 7 ban­ned coun­tries. Al­so ban­ning Ch­ris­tians from tho­se coun­tries who on the fa­ce of the Or­der could not en­ter the U.S.

Ca­na­dians who we­re Ci­ti­zens or Per­ma­nent Re­si­dents of Ca­na­da but al­so ci­ti­zens of one of the 7 Coun­tries we­re al­so ba­rred entry in­to the Uni­ted Sta­tes. Ca­na­da’s Mi­nis­ter of Ci­ti­zens­hip and Im­mi­gra­tion is a Ca­na­dian but al­so a Ci­ti­zen of So­ma­lia and even he can­not en­ter the Uni­ted Sta­tes un­der the terms of the

Exe­cu­ti­ve Or­der.

Many Ca­na­dian schools can­ce­lled their school trips to the Uni­ted Sta­tes be­cau­se many stu­dents we­re Mus­lim and from the 7 ban­ned coun­tries and the schools would not risk that so­me of their stu­dents would be de­nied entry. Trumps’ ban and ap­pa­rent an­ti-Mus­lim po­li­cies al­so cau­sed many tra­ve­llers to can­cel their plan­ned trips to the Uni­ted Sta­tes.

When the Fe­de­ral Court of Ap­peal up­held the ru­ling to de­cla­re the Exe­cu­ti­ve Or­der un­cons­ti­tu­tio­nal Trump vo­wed to ta­ke the ca­se to the Uni­ted Sta­tes Su­pre­me Court. In all no less than 5 Uni­ted Sta­tes Fe­de­ral Court Jud­ges ru­led the or­der un­cons­ti­tu­tio­nal. Due to the rus­hed and poorly thought out na­tu­re of the Or­der and the lack of no­ti­ce and lack of due pro­cess it was fairly ob­vious that the pre­vious de­ci­sions over­tur­ning Trump’s Exe­cu­ti­ve Or­der would not be re­ver­sed.

It ap­pears that Do­nald Trump who has ne­ver had any per­vious ex­pe­rien­ce in go­vern­ment saw him­self as an Exe­cu­ti­ve of a Com­pany and not a country that has th­ree dif­fe­rent le­vels of go­vern­ment and clear di­vi­sion of po­wers. Trump no doubt lear­ned a va­lua­ble les­son about the Ru­le of Law and that the­re are le­gal li­mits on what he can do.

Trump is in­tent to con­ti­nue his an­ti-mi­grant and an­ti-re­fu­gee po­li­cies. On Fe­bruary 20, 2017 a draft Me­mo­ran­dum on the “En­for­ce­ment of the Im­mi­gra­tion Laws to Ser­ve the Na­tio­nal In­te­rest” was pre­pa­red. Ho­we­ver, this ti­me to fo­cus was di­rec­ted to the many ille­gal La­ti­nos li­ving in the Uni­ted Sta­tes.

The­re are mo­re than 950,000 ille­gal mi­grants with “le­gal re­mo­val or­ders” who ha­ve di­sap­pea­red in the Ame­ri­can po­pu­la­tion.

The­re may­be as many as 10 mi­llion ille­gals li­ving and wor­king in the Uni­ted Sta­tes. Trump and his ad­mi­nis­tra­tion ha­ve pro­mi­sed to arrest and de­port as many ille­gals as pos­si­ble. This in­clu­ded groups with chil­dren born in the Uni­ted Sta­tes or who ha­ve li­ved in Ame­ri­can for many years that we­re trea­ted mo­re le­niently by the pre­vious Oba­ma Ad­mi­nis­tra­tion.

Trump has an­noun­ced that he plans to de­port lar­ge num­bers of ille­gal mi­grants in­clu­ding tho­se who are sus­pec­ted of ha­ving com­mit­ted even mi­nor cri­mi­nal of­fen­ses. He al­so wants to use exis­ting laws to ex­pe­di­te re­fu­gee clai­mants and gi­ve US Im­mi­gra­tion Of­fi­cers wi­de dis­cre­tio­nary po­wers to re­ject re­fu­gee clai­mants and ex­pe­di­te re­mo­val.

Trump ho­pes to re­mo­ve many of the­se clai­mants to Me­xi­co even be­fo­re they ha­ve a hea­ring on their asy­lum claims. Not su­re how he is going to get Me­xi­co to agree to this plan. Trump al­so plans to go ahead with his 21 bi­llion do­llar Wall to try to keep out Me­xi­cans and ot­her La­tino’s from Cen­tral Ame­ri­ca from ille­gally en­te­ri­ng the Uni­ted Sta­tes.

With all of the sca­re mon­ge­ring and hy­pe over de­por­ting un­do­cu­men­ted mi­grants many ille­gals stop­ped going to the fields to har­vest the crops due to a fear of being arres­ted and de­por­ted. The crops are now rot­ting in the fields sin­ce most Ame­ri­cans will not do this ty­pe of work for a pit­tan­ce.

Trump and the Ame­ri­can peo­ple are about to dis­co­ver how much they de­pend on cheap mi­grant la­bour. It is going to be very in­ter­es­ting ti­mes in the Uni­ted Sta­tes un­til they sort out their la­bour and im­mi­gra­tion pro­blems and learn to li­ve with Do­nald Trump.

Ed­ward C. Co­rri­gan is a law­yer cer­ti­fied as a Spe­cia­list in Ci­ti­zens­hip and Im­mi­gra­tion Law and Im­mi­gra­tion and Re­fu­gee Pro­tec­tion by the Law So­ciety of Up­per Ca­na­da in Lon­don, On­ta­rio, Ca­na­da. He can be reached at co­rri­gan­law@ed­co­rri­gan. ca or at (519) 439-4015.

Ed Co­rri­gan

Newspapers in Spanish

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.